Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

That's what blows all the this means we were right to go in arguments apart. We had ways of finding out if he did have WMD and the UK and US governments didn't let the people involved finish their work. On 3/17/06, Larry C. Lyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just a reminder the people on the

Re: funny, sad but true

Shouldn't the subject have read Unfunny, offensive and distorted? On 3/17/06, Michael Dinowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A guy in Paris saw a pit bull attacking a toddler. He killed the pit bull and saved the child's life. Reporters swarmed the fellow. Tell us! What's your name? All Paris

Re: Too Many U

On 3/14/06, Larry C. Lyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It could be worse, I've been attempting to explain usability to a marketing person. Easy, fit four more steering wheels, three extra gear levers and a dozen randomly placed pedals to his car. Shouldn't take too long for him to see the

Re: funny, sad but true

That's the modern media in a nutshell. Unfunny, offensive and distorted. Shouldn't the subject have read Unfunny, offensive and distorted? On 3/17/06, Michael Dinowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A guy in Paris saw a pit bull attacking a toddler. He killed the pit bull and saved the child's

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

You mean the UN inspectors that were jerked around, were out of country for over a year and basically were forced to play hide and seek with anything Saddam had? Those inspectors? And the IAEA who can't see anything nuclear in any country? If you said that there were a troop of junior

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

I'm more inclined to trust them tham Bush or Blair. On 3/17/06, Michael Dinowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You mean the UN inspectors that were jerked around, were out of country for over a year and basically were forced to play hide and seek with anything Saddam had? Those inspectors? And

Re: Now this lawsuit ain't a hoax

:-| :-\ :-/ 0_0 *bip!* *bip!* *bippity!* *bip!* On 3/16/06, Nick McClure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmm, if he was operating as an agent of the city the city is responsible for damages. If his wife is the one suing, then I think it should go through.

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Those other countries did not consider the Intelligence strong enough to join America in the attack. So nope, that's not the answer to the riddle, unfortunately. On 3/16/06, Nick McClure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When you have your own guys, plus other countries all agreeing that they have them,

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Nick wrote: When you have your own guys, plus other countries all agreeing that they have them, then the risk factor seems within the bounds. Here's why you're wrong: let's say I tell you that Winnebago stock is about to triple and you should put your life savings into it. You talk to some

Got new Laptop

Last night I bit thr bullet nd bought my new laptop. My wife balked when she saw the prices on Dell so I bought locally at Circuit City. I did find a nice Toshiba Satellite A105 for a great price. I splurged on a memory upgrade to 1GB and a 100GB hard drive. Because of that, I need to wait

Re: netflix recommendations?

You could always try giving Family Guy a whirl. It has a lot of 80's references to cartoons and sitcoms. Bob ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:200383 Archives:

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

But those guys weren't given complete access, and they did report it seemed Iraq was hiding or being less than cooperative. Also they never provided proof of the outstand weapons being destroyed. -Original Message- From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

mmm.. So then who were all the other countries that you are saying agreed with the US invading Iraq based on evidence of WMD? On 3/17/06, Nick McClure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But those guys weren't given complete access, and they did report it seemed Iraq was hiding or being less than

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

They were getting what they needed, admittedly it had to be dragged out of Saddam. On 3/17/06, Nick McClure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But those guys weren't given complete access, and they did report it seemed Iraq was hiding or being less than cooperative. Also they never provided proof of

RE: US President Reaffirms Strike First Policy

Good. -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Vivec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 4:38 PM To: CF-Community Subject: US President Reaffirms Strike First Policy http://tinyurl.com/gvhvp CBS/AP) Undaunted by the difficult war in

RE: US President Reaffirms Strike First Policy

Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and the Dominican Republic, Thailand? That was all at the same time right? I know in the 90s we had ops going on in Asia, Africa and eastern Europe all at the same time. -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Raymond Camden

RE: Now this lawsuit ain't a hoax

Read that this morning on the train, wtf is wrong with people? -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Vivec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 6:36 PM To: CF-Community Subject: Now this lawsuit ain't a hoax But they haven't succeeded

Re: US President Reaffirms Strike First Policy

A first (pre-emptive) strike is a no brainer, even for a liberal like me. This president has f-ed this up though, pre-emptively striking a country based on bad/manipulated intelligence though so I don't think he should be trumpeting this out in public. How much more of the world does he want to

Re: US President Reaffirms Strike First Policy

Whatever happened to Speak softly, but carry a big stick. I guess it got thrown out the window just like keeping your religion private. Does anyone else remember those days when you new people had a religion, but it was something you didn't ask people about. On 3/17/06, Loathe [EMAIL

Re: netflix recommendations?

Every time you mention anime I get excited and then you recommend Mizyaki. Ugh. And you really need to watch some new stuff like, Haibane-Renmei or RahXephon (series, not movie) or Argentosoma. I suspect though that Dana wouldn't like most of my recommendations. They wouldn't be hentai, but sex

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

What's crazy is that the weapon's inspectors said they didn't think they were there, the Bush Administration has admitted that it wasn't about the WMD, and now we hear that even Saddam was blowing smoke about them and people are STILL talking about whether they were there or not? WTF? Get a new

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Not really, even when the last group of inspectors were there they said they weren't given full access, they weren't allowed to perform interviews the way the wanted. Without some force we would never have known. -Original Message- From: Wayne Putterill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent:

RE: US President Reaffirms Strike First Policy

The big stick is the first strike capability. -Original Message- From: Zaphod Beeblebrox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 9:16 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: US President Reaffirms Strike First Policy Whatever happened to Speak softly, but carry a big

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Ok, I was with you until you mentioned Gitmo. You would rather they were penned up where? Or would you rather they were just executed, the way that both the laws of land warfare and Geneva accords say we can. Should we just kill them all Dana? -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

But it wasn't like that, it wasn't that Germany said we heard somebody saying he has them, Germany was saying, we think he has them. Russia was saying it. They all were saying it. They weren't saying we've heard a lot of buzz that points to him having them. -Original Message- From:

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Killed three thousand Americans. Routinely beat and even killed their citizens for suck infractions as: not having a beard, listening to the radio, dancing, smiling in public, and dancing. The deforested the county. Why, no one really knows, although there is speculation that it was so the

Re: Too Many U

With these people the only way to explain stuff is to use a large spiked club. After you've enjoyed explaining it to them for a while, especially over the head, then you can try telling them verbally. larry On 3/17/06, Wayne Putterill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/14/06, Larry C. Lyons [EMAIL

Re: US President Reaffirms Strike First Policy

correct, now where's the speak softly part? On 3/17/06, Nick McClure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The big stick is the first strike capability. -Original Message- From: Zaphod Beeblebrox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 9:16 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re:

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

What about the innocents that have been held there - such as the three brits who were arrested on a trip to attend a relatives wedding? They are out now, but I have little doubt that there are others held who are completely innocent. On 3/17/06, Loathe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, I was with

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Didn't they, I just figured they thought the attack against Iraq would hurt them economically. Russia in a major way, and France as well. -Original Message- From: Vivec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 6:39 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Saddam Pretended to

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

I didn't say they agreed to invade, but they said there was evidence. -Original Message- From: Vivec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 8:45 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack mmm.. So then who were all the

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

On 3/17/06, Nick McClure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Didn't they, I just figured they thought the attack against Iraq would hurt them economically. Russia in a major way, and France as well. A common misconception it seems, some people have to reduce everything to money - bizarrely they are

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Interesting that he still got re-elected, at least during our election the public opinion of the war wasn't so negative . -Original Message- From: Wayne Putterill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 9:57 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Saddam Pretended to have

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Without some force we would never have known. Says you. The Weapons Inspectors said they wanted more time. Other countries in the security council said the evidence was not compelling enough to warrant an attack, and that the inspectors should be given more time and more diplomatic pressure

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

How about the violations of the cease fire? How about the UN resolutions allowing us to use force to enforce the sanctions that were being violated? How about the attacks against American Aircraft? How about the fact that oil is actually of vital importance to the national security of the

RE: funny, sad but true

Sounded spot on to me. -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Wayne Putterill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 3:20 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: funny, sad but true Shouldn't the subject have read Unfunny, offensive and

RE: funny, sad but true

Yes, yes it is. -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 4:37 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: funny, sad but true That's the modern media in a nutshell. Unfunny, offensive and

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

The IAEA that moved tons and tons of radioactive materials out of the country after the invasion, that IAEA? -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 4:41 AM To: CF-Community Subject:

RE: Now this lawsuit ain't a hoax

Sure, if he gets fired or he pays the costs. -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Vivec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 6:37 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Now this lawsuit ain't a hoax :-| :-\ :-/ 0_0 *bip!* *bip!* *bippity!*

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Which other countries? The ones that had lucrative deals in Iraq? Those other countries? -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Vivec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 6:39 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Saddam Pretended to have

google pages...

jsdut got 100megs of free web space at google.. just playing around with there html editor. http://pihrig.googlepages.com/home pretty sweet ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:200413 Archives:

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

The other countries of the world which Nick said supported the attack on Iraq. The attack which was not about ceasefire violations, but about the clear and present danger presented by STOCKPILES of WMD in Iraq. So indeed, what about all those things? They are irrelevant to the attack on Iraq.And

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

I agree with all of these, but somebody is going to say Why weren't we told that from the beginning? And while that is a good question, I still agree with you. -Original Message- From: Loathe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:11 AM To: CF-Community Subject:

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

I never said the supported the attack, I said they also believed Iraq had the weapons. Don't put words in my mouth. -Original Message- From: Vivec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:18 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Why not? Watcha gonna do huh? Launch a preemptive strike?? hee hee hee hee *runs* :-p On 3/17/06, Nick McClure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I never said the supported the attack, I said they also believed Iraq had the weapons. Don't put words in my mouth.

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

The final report issued by the IAEA was quite unequivocal, they said no WMD's. Given the shrubbery's pervarication, I'd rather trust the IAEA. On 3/17/06, Nick McClure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But those guys weren't given complete access, and they did report it seemed Iraq was hiding or being

RE: US President Reaffirms Strike First Policy

Over at the State Department. -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Zaphod Beeblebrox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 9:48 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: US President Reaffirms Strike First Policy correct, now where's the speak

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

At gitmo? What were they being held for? -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Wayne Putterill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 9:50 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack What about the

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Really, the UK didn't say the same thing? -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Vivec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:04 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack Without some force we

damn - got stuck in the other Mariott

Just made my reservations for CFunited - looks like the Marriott North is already full, now I'm stuck at the one a mile and a half away. Dammit! ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:200422 Archives:

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Well, mostly because it isn't nice, but I'm not opposed to launching a preemptive strike if I have to. -Original Message- From: Vivec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:33 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

When was that report released? -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:42 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack The final report issued

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

I ... J.. Fuck it. -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Vivec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:33 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack Why not? Watcha gonna do huh?

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Uh, when did the IAEA have anything to do with Chemical weapons? -Original Message- From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:42 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack The final report issued by the

Re: damn - got stuck in the other Mariott

SLACKER! On 3/17/06, Ray Champagne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just made my reservations for CFunited - looks like the Marriott North is already full, now I'm stuck at the one a mile and a half away. Dammit! ~|

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2003/ebsp2003n006.shtml March 7 2003. Just before the invasion. Here's an executive summary of the report: Statements of the Director General 7 March 2003 | New York, USA Statement to the United Nations Security Council The Status of Nuclear

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

OK are you saying that nuclear weapons are NOT WMD's next thing you know you'll be quibbling over the definition of is. On 3/17/06, Nick McClure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Uh, when did the IAEA have anything to do with Chemical weapons? -Original Message- From: Larry C. Lyons

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

No, but I am saying the IAEA wasn't charged with looking into chemical and biological weapons. So while they didn't find nuclear weapon making stuff, I don't recall them concluding on the other stuff. Did they? Where in this report did they state they looked for chemical and biological weapons

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

I was referring to nuclear weapons. So the bush administration was never referring to them? Is that what you're claiming. That there was never any yellow cake uranium claims? Or that those aluminium tubes were actually for rockets? On 3/17/06, Nick McClure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, but I am

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

i believe that's spelled *nucular*. :) Larry C. Lyons wrote: I was referring to nuclear weapons. So the bush administration was never referring to them? Is that what you're claiming. That there was never any yellow cake uranium claims? Or that those aluminium tubes were actually for

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Um, while Iraq was in violation of a ton of UN based rules, they were actually exporting more oil at cheaper prices than before the gulf war or after the invasion. I know a lot of people want to romanticize and say that this is a war for oil but the opposite is true. Oil was flowing before the

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Except that there are people from Saddam's own ranks saying that they were moved and even the pre-gulf war stuff we know existed still isn't accounted for. Maybe this guy is blowing smoke to sell his book but the accusation has been made a million times before and no one has looked into it.

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

OK, that's fine, but the Administration also pointed to the list of known weapons after the first gulf war, and the inspectors could prove they had been destroyed, and Iraq couldn't prove they had been destroyed. -Original Message- From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent:

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

citation for that please. I've heard a lot of people on this list claim such but no one has provided data supporting that claim. Move and moved where for instance. People have been claiming that all this stuff has been moved but no supporting evidence for that claim has been advanced. On

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Given that the IAEA is UN and has been *known* to 'fudge' the facts and not investigate as well as it should, I'd rather trust neither. The final report issued by the IAEA was quite unequivocal, they said no WMD's. Given the shrubbery's pervarication, I'd rather trust the IAEA. On 3/17/06,

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

*known* to 'fudge' the facts that's a fairly strong statement Michael, care to support that with real data and not polemics. On 3/17/06, Michael Dinowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Given that the IAEA is UN and has been *known* to 'fudge' the facts and not investigate as well as it should, I'd

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

What do you expect Larry, Syria is going to stand up and say they have them? Iran maybe? Think man. Iran and Syria both allowed the Iraqi Air force to land and hide in their countries during the first gulf war. Iran and Iraq may have gone to war and not liked each other very much, but when the

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Citation? That was all over the news, Hell Bill Clinton mentioned it on David Letterman's show after the invasion. Dave asked about it, and Clinton said that there was still a lot of stuff that had never been accounted for, and while Saddam may have destroyed it he had to prove they were gone.

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

how about you actually deal with the point being discussed instead of spouting another load of spin. On 3/17/06, Loathe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about the violations of the cease fire? How about the UN resolutions allowing us to use force to enforce the sanctions that were being violated?

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

So there is no demonstratable evidence of it. Only slander, rumour, conjecture and propaganda. That simply doesn't fly. Any more than the Trust Us mantra that the Bush adminstration has been saying on and on. Then they started electronic surveillance of law abiding citizens. Don't you think that

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

So why not provide the citation for it. All over the news is nothing. On 3/17/06, Nick McClure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Citation? That was all over the news, Hell Bill Clinton mentioned it on David Letterman's show after the invasion. Dave asked about it, and Clinton said that there was still

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Here you go Larry http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/01/25/wirq25.xmlsSheet=/news/2004/01/25/ixnewstop.html David Kay, the former head of the coalition's hunt for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, yesterday claimed that part of Saddam Hussein's secret weapons programme

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

he got reelected against an opposition party that were unelectable. with the smallest share of the vote ever - in fact in england he got less votes and less mp's than the opposition. it was only the solid socialist areas of wales and scotland that gave him his much reduced majority. On 3/17/06,

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Sometimes Larry, I wonder if you remember anything that you read that doesn't support your position. I know this has been sent to the list before. ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:200446 Archives:

Re: funny, sad but true

On 3/17/06, Loathe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sounded spot on to me. It doesn't surprise me that your thoughts on the french are that prejudiced and incorrect. -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Wayne Putterill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent:

Mad Scientist Alert

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060315/od_afp/sciencebiotechoffbeat_060315182046 Well, maybe not so mad, but definitely Sci-fi coming true. How far are we away for growing microchips with each switch only being a few molecules? -- Ian Skinner Web Programmer BloodSource

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Why does one message make it to the list before the other? Here's the link again, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/01/25/wirq25.xmlsSheet=/news/2004/01/25/ixnewstop.html ~| Message:

RE: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

There were no weapons found, there is no was to ever prove they did or did not exist at this point. BTW Why is that spin? Are all of my statements true? How about you stop with America bashing bullshit? And the anti-Semitic bullshit that you lefties like to spout. It makes me sick. How about

RE: funny, sad but true

It doesn't surprise me that your weak and scared. -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Wayne Putterill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 12:01 PM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: funny, sad but true On 3/17/06, Loathe [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

That's why I put it in stars. They have been accused strongly on many occasions to be lax in their reviews and allowing things to slip by but there is no concrete evidence that they're letting things go. Accusations and circumstantial evidence is not enough to say they're standard corrupt UN

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Which was later shown to be incorrect. What you did not mention was that the only sites and papers still playing up this right wingnut fantasy are sites like worldnet and frontpage. http://www.antiwrap.com/?945 Report Finds No Evidence Syria Hid Iraqi Arms By Dana Priest Washington Post Staff

Re: funny, sad but true

OK, replace the French with the BBC and it works even better. The point is not the nationality but the train of thought. BTW, of all the places/people attacked and kidnapped in Gaza last week, the BBC was never touched. British council office gets torched, 3 journalists get kidnapped but the

Re: funny, sad but true

Because the French have a long and proud history of championing Jewish people, and because the French always treat the non-French with the same courtesy as they do themselves? On 3/17/06, Wayne Putterill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/17/06, Loathe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sounded spot on to

Re: funny, sad but true

right about now i'd bust in with a joke to try and ease the tension. but that's kinda how this whole thing got started :) you can't tell, but i'm making finger-shadow animals against my wall. it's funny. On 3/17/06, Loathe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It doesn't surprise me that your weak and

Re: funny, sad but true

look! an eagle! /me makes a finger shadow eagle On 3/17/06, Jerry Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because the French have a long and proud history of championing Jewish people, and because the French always treat the non-French with the same courtesy as they do themselves? On 3/17/06,

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

And yet it's still mentioned by at least one of Saddam's people. But to be fair, he may have said it to sell books. Got to be skeptical on all, not selected. :) Which was later shown to be incorrect. What you did not mention was that the only sites and papers still playing up this right

Re: funny, sad but true

Shadow puppets, shadow puppets, rah rah rah! right about now i'd bust in with a joke to try and ease the tension. but that's kinda how this whole thing got started :) you can't tell, but i'm making finger-shadow animals against my wall. it's funny.

Re: funny, sad but true

purdy! Charlie Griefer wrote: look! an eagle! /me makes a finger shadow eagle On 3/17/06, Jerry Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because the French have a long and proud history of championing Jewish people, and because the French always treat the non-French with the same courtesy as

Re: funny, sad but true

Eagles are not inherently funny. Although some of Ben Franklin's musing on them are. Try a plattapus. Now, that's a funny shadow puppet. On 3/17/06, Charlie Griefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: look! an eagle! /me makes a finger shadow eagle

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Larry, There's enough in there that definetely makes this not an open and shut case: unable to rule out unofficial movement of limited WMD-related materials. The survey group said it followed up on reports that a Syrian security officer had discussed collaboration with Iraq on weapons, but it

Re: funny, sad but true

i was gonna close with the platypus. but you're right. i should have opened with something like an armadillo. On 3/17/06, Jerry Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eagles are not inherently funny. Although some of Ben Franklin's musing on them are. Try a plattapus. Now, that's a funny shadow

Re: funny, sad but true

Not platypus. Those are too common. Plattapus is much rarer, and therefore funnier. (God, reading my own posts causes my stomach to hurt) On 3/17/06, Charlie Griefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i was gonna close with the platypus. but you're right. i should have opened with something like an

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Note the words there - taking him out. If we just took out Saddam and his people, then it would be state sponsored assassination. A war on the other hand is more 'legal'. But in pursuing the war, the Bush administration showed it's total lack of understanding of the middle east and Arab

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Something really big, like a secret nuclear program, can be very successfully kept secret for years and years. We have more than a few examples of that in recent history- Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, India, Lybia. An insular, secretive country like Syria can hide almost anything. I'm not saying I

The Winnebago Index

On 3/17/06, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's why you're wrong: let's say I tell you that Winnebago stock is about to triple and you should put your life savings into it. What ever happened to guns and butter? -Cameron

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

I'm not anti american, I'm anti anyone who makes this world a worse place to be. I'm not bashing america, my own country had a large part in this disgusting affair. As for calling me antisemetic, anyone who knows me would laugh out loud at that - particularly my jewish friends. I would lay down

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

Wayne, just be glad your fellow countrymen a generation ago didn't grow out, otherwise, you'd probably be speaking German. Wayne Putterill wrote: I'm not anti american, I'm anti anyone who makes this world a worse place to be. I'm not bashing america, my own country had a large part in

Re: Saddam Pretended to have Weapons to prevent Attack

*falls over* *twitch* *twitch* info...overload...scrolling...scrolling..ack..ack...* ^_^ On 3/17/06, Larry C. Lyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2003/ebsp2003n006.shtml ~| Message:

Re: funny, sad but true

Now that's an odd post. Weak in what way. scared of what? On 3/17/06, Loathe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It doesn't surprise me that your weak and scared. -- Tim Heald [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-300-3911 -Original Message- From: Wayne Putterill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday,

This Internet Thingy may be useful after all.

I did my taxes and e-filed Tuesday of last week, refunds from both state and federal deposited in my bank account by today. -- Ian Skinner Web Programmer BloodSource www.BloodSource.org Sacramento, CA - | 1 | | - Binary Soduko | | | - C code. C code

  1   2   >